Talk:Kelvin–Helmholtz mechanism

Calculation Error?
I tried to replicate the calculation shown here and rather than 1.1e41 J, I got 2.2e41 J, which gave me a lifespan 2 times larger. Is this just me?

Blablabliam (talk) 18:59, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Your numerical computation is correct, as it is the number given in the article. However, the calculation presented is wrong by a factor of two. The reason is that it only takes into account the potential energy, while the total energy has to be considered for the analysis to be complete. The total energy can be calculated using the virial theorem, which gives one-half the gravitational potential energy, hence the factor of two mismatch. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.8.188.210 (talk) 10:37, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Jupiter/Saturn
"This mechanism is evident on Jupiter." Not Jupiter but Saturn. Jupiter mostly consists of liquids, and liquids can hardly compress. -Hapsiainen 22:45, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)

Many sources tell it is evident on Jupiter, too. Also, Jupiter consists of mostly the same elements as Saturn, most notably molecular Hydrogen (H2). It is a liquid just because of the pressure. see http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/jupiterfact.html - Rgerhards 19:38, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

It would seem like using the current energy state would indicate age not lifetime.
By dividing the current energy state of the Sun by yearly energy output, the result would be the number of years this energy could have been released at this rate up until now assuming all mass started at infinity. The expected lifetime would depend on what limit was put on the eventual radius. If the radius is allowed to decrease by a factor of 1000 or more, your energy output could continue for a billion years or more assuming constant energy output. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.230.201.245 (talk) 08:21, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kelvin–Helmholtz mechanism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151222105230/http://www.aw-bc.com/astrophysics/ to http://www.aw-bc.com/astrophysics

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:04, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

AKA lapse rate
Can we add verbiage showing how this is the same mechanism by which the lapse rate comes about (gravitational auto-compression)? The conversion of translational mode (kinetic) energy in the z-axis DOF to gravitational potential energy with altitude (and vice versa)?

I'd do it, but I've never quite grasped the editing process here, so any time I try to edit something, I always mess things up. 76.30.103.137 (talk) 22:40, 16 June 2024 (UTC)